> I don't think Craig really wanted to say his specific example of key
> behavior was the right way and the only way.

It sure sounded like that :-)

But thinking back of my "own-made-UI-basic-course" I know that different
users can look at same things different way (although you most often have a
majority for one view). But when it comes to different cultures your UI-basic
of the light switch can be totally wrong.

It could be something of that we got here, because we three swedes (I, Mats
and Linus) thought it was okey with play/ok and stop/cancel - although Linus
thought it could be luxury in the player with its limited interface.

> The nice thing about using "PLAY" and "STOP" would be that if you wanted to
> cancel, you could hit STOP and when it prompts discard changes just hit STOP
> again and you have cancelled.

Jupp, but that violates common sense (not mine that is, because I don't have
one in this case :-)

> Oh, and Linus, I have to disagree with you when you say that general UI
> rules/concepts don't apply here since those rules/concepts apply to
> everything we interact with, not just computers.

Well, this very-very-very-lame player-hardware violated every UI I knew about
within 5 minutes from opening the package. The Archos-team should have been
in use of your UI-course :-)

Nevertheless, I also miss input from real/many users. If I knew that 7 or 8
of 10 player-users don't want the cancel function then I would remove it
myself (or if everybody was against me). As it is now I don't really know
what I would like it to be.

But then this is just a little UI-part. I would like to change quite a large
part in order to follow my UI-rules. But I don't have time to think out
exactly how and then drag it with Rockbox-developers and then code it and then
correct it when people understand what I've done.